7 Days: Teflon-Obama? w/ Dorgan, Huffington, Green & Bender

What's the matter with... Philadelphia?

There didn't seem to be much "brotherly love" in either of the pivotal Democratic presidential debates held there -- not in the Russert-Williams grilling of Hillary Clinton last October and not in the Gibson-Stephanopoulos cross-examination of Barack Obama last Wednesday.

Was the one thing each debate had in common that panelists went after the front-runner each time? I asked this of our headliner Senator Sen. Byron Dorgan and then panelists Arianna Huffington and David Bender. And the answer and conversation went off on... ABC News.

Being a hopelessly high-minded Democrat, I too agree it would have been ideal to have asked any so-called "gotcha" questions at the end, not the start of the 90 minutes -- and questions about William Ayers and flag pins reflect the awful rise of Gaffegate, when the sensational pushes out the significant. A Gresham's law of politics.

But Gibson-Stephanopoulos aren't on the ballot. What really matters in the days before the Pennsylvania moment is how Barack Obama responded to the assault. In my view, he lost the debate and won the post-debate.

Let's face it. Obama had a bad month and week. Perhaps not as bad as American Airlines and Bear Stearns but the combination of a poor debate performance and answering questions about Rev. Wright and his "bitter" comments put his campaign on the defensive.

So why haven't the polls appreciably moved? The headlines changed, voters didn't. So far, Obama appears to have developed a Teflon skin every bit as impressive as Reagan's. Why?

*Style: His casual, cool, bemused manner -- including his hip-hop move of physically flicking off the attacks and teasing his opponent as "Annie Oakley" -- is very winsome. Recall how when Jimmy Carter accurately nailed Ronald Reagan for wanting to privatize and thereby undermine Social Security, Reagan's now uber-famous "there you go again" completely turned the tables on the hapless incumbent. During the ABC debate, as Alessandra Stanley wrote in the New York Times, Obama managed to "hang onto his soft diction, flat affects and refusal to project anger." When I asked one Democratic Senator about what Obama was like with his colleagues, he noted that "he's very at ease, funny and unflappable", which are not bad traits in the heat of a presidential primary contest or indeed a presidency.

*Chorus. Whenever Obama is criticized, by Clinton or by the media, Obama-ites are indignant and intense in their massive retaliation, especially in the blogosphere. It's immensely valuable for a candidate to have an ardent base of support that protects him or her when s/he does screw up, as inevitably happens. Clinton does have older women on her side but they're no match now in the viral verdicts that now dominate our 24-second news cycle.

*Money. Obama's phenomenal fund-raising, doubling Clinton's month after month, also provides him a wall of commercials to stand behind. While 30-second ads this late in a presidential campaign are not decisive, as we say of chicken soup, they can't 'hoit.'

*The Drip-Drip Strategy. Clinton grabbed an early lead in polls and Superdelegates when she was the strong early favorite. Now the momentum is largely Obama's way, as his campaign shrewdly releases a super-delegate here and super-endorsement there (Reich, Nunn, Borsen, Dan Rooney of the Pittsburgh Steelers) to blunt bad news.

All of this helped slow or stem any serious questioning of his bona fides or lead. Indeed, there were moments in the debate that a policy roundtable could plausibly question: he's now for the Scalia view that there's an individual right to bear arms in the second amendment, which contradicts the 1939 Supreme Court decision on the matter; he falsely denied that his handwriting was on that decade-old questionnaire about choice; and as George Packer wrote in The New Yorker, it was a flub or worse "to equate guns and religion with racism and xenophobia," especially since small town voters have embraced hunting and church pre-industrial revolution, certainly pre-Bushonomics.

And, like it or not, why are McCain insiders starting to rub their hands with glee that attacks on Obama's positions and associations make him the more vulnerable Democrat in the Fall? McCain in effect implied as much when he harshly attacked the Ayers-Obama connection on This Week with George Stephanopoulos this Sunday.

None of this broke through because of Obama's thick Teflon. Then, because of a campaign with a powerful theme of change and a candidate who carries it off with poise and flair, 35,000 show up to cheer him in Philadelphia Friday night. 35,000 is a lot of people, probably the most ever for a presidential candidate. John McCain has trouble attracting 350.

Hillary Clinton now reminds me of John Kerry in his general election. When Kerry personally bailed out his stumbling campaign with brilliant debate appearances against Bush, he closed the gap, for a while. Clinton too is better than her own campaign, as her smarts and grit keep it close and competitive. But Obama so far has met and passed his Timex Test -- he's takin' a lickin' and kept on tickin'. At least until Tuesday in Pennsylvania.

Listen to our panel on Pennsylvania and beyond here.

EXCERPTS FROM THE APRIL 19TH 7 DAYS PROGRAM, W/DORGAN, HUFFINGTON. GREEN & BENDER

DORGAN: Q: How can Democrats lose a debate to John McCain on whether we should increase taxes on those earning over $250,000 annually? "Well, we shouldn't. But I refuse to lose a debate that I'm not having. McCain and others say that the Democrats want to raise taxes on middle income workers. That's not true at all. Do Democrats believe that the folks on Wall Street who are earning billions of dollars each and are paying 15% rate on income tax should pay more in taxes? You're darn right I do! I think most Americans would feel that way as well" GREEN: "When they say, 'Oh, Dorgan, you're engaging in class warfare,' what's your answer?" DORGAN: "Warren Buffett says, 'Class warfare exists and my class is winning.' And he's the richest man in the world."

DORGAN Q: What should a Democratic presidential nominee say about gasoline prices at the pump? "I'd stop the Bush administration from putting 70,000 gallons of oil underground everyday. We ought to increase the margin requirements for those who are speculating on the futures markets. You can control 100,000 gallons of oil for 4-6 thousand dollars. To set the country on a real path to less dependence on foreign oil and more conservation and more efficiency and more investment and more predictability in the investment capability in renewable energy and renewable fuels."

DORGAN: Q: How optimistic are you that Americans this Fall won't fall for distracting arguments about flag pins but will say, 'we're in a bad war and a bad economy -- what are your plans for each?' "I sure hope so. So, McCain says 'bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb, bomb Iran' and was making a joke, right? Are we gonna dance on the heads of these pins from now to election day or are the American people really going to decide on what is really central to people's lives and their future? Make a choice this November to make a fundamental change in this country."

HUFFINGTON: Q: Were the questions posed by ABC to Barack Obama like the questions directed at Hillary Clinton five months ago by NBC's Tim Russert -- par for the course for a front-runner? "It doesn't have anything to do with being a front-runner. It has to do with the way the right (wing) and their talking points have actually infiltrated the public debate. I found it stunning and honestly I don't think it's about Obama or Clinton. There was something about the relentless use of Republican talking points."

HUFFINGTON: Q: How do you feel about breaking the Obama story where he said that voters in small towns are bitter and clinging to church and guns? "There was very little choice but to post the story. We did not know that it would be so distorted and manipulated by the media, but it was a newsworthy story and we are a news site. I think it was a sort of defining moment. People now believe us that we will post newsworthy stories and the chips will fall where they may."

BENDER: Q: The Pope has talked a lot about sexual abuse in the Catholic Church on his trip this week; has it helped defuse this horrible problem? "The Pope is the head of state. The Vatican is a sovereign state as Rachel Maddow points out, probably smaller than our base in Baghdad. What normal heads of state do when they visit America is they review the troops. They go and see the military. Well, someone in the White House figured out that they couldn't have the Pope review the troops so let's have him review...the boy scouts! Only in Bush's America can that happen."

Comments

[ljsfolly]

When Hillary stood up and decided Mark Penn would be her decider she gave up her rights to run her campaign. He has kept her in the red with his massive charges againest her account. Looking at how she pays him 5 plus million while the little guys in towns she has rallies suffer with unpaid bills from her campaign. He has undermined her and has made it hard for her "people" to work together. It is far too late to save anything as she changed horses and brought in Maggie the "I work for free" lady. And no control of Bill who has done the campaign bit often enough to know better but when Penn is the decider Bill has become impotent at best and he hates that. She has brought about her own demise and still cannot see it. Like the junkie who thinks the next fix will take care of all of his problems Hillary continues to go on and on and on thinking somehow she will get the job she decided she was entitled to. Thank God we can still vote and I hope deced the next president. With machines and people will to alter results as we have seen in the past elections we have not gotten so advanced that we can trust them all.

[Nonamnesiac]

It's not that Obama has teflon, it's that Hillary personally is such a load. Hillary is NOT better than her campaign. Her chosen strategist, Mark Penn, reflected her. Her new strategist is far better than she is.

Hillary has demonstrated over and over again that she is a warmongerer with a limited world view. Her latest comments -- offering US troops' (including my family) lives and limbs to keep two bit Middle Eastern despots in power -- is just more proof of her warmongerer, neo-Con mentality, (along with voting to invade Iraq and Kyl-Lieberman).

Her lies about trying to join the Marines almost got through, but must now be analyzed in light of her outright lies about Bosnia -- an anti-Vietnam war activist suddenly trying to portray herself as the female incarnation of Sergeant Rock.

Same on trade. She is now attempting to portray her long vigorous defense of the despicable NAFTA and its progeny (most recently supporting extension of NAFTA principles to Peru within the past couple of months) as if she's the reincarnation of Eugene Debs -- always in opposition to it.

People see this constant lying and take her for what she is -- not her campaign -- her -- a load.

Obama's considerable weaknesses are dwarfed by her huge ones, and so the polls don't move, despite his weaknesses.

[GuyInNC]

what do you mean no change in the polls> One week ago, before the debate, all the cable news pundits were pushing the Gallup tracking poll showing Obama's new big lead of 11%.

Less than a week later, that Gallup lead is now 2%.

That looks like movement to me. Not to Mr Green apparently.

[meljomur]

Dear Mark Green,

I think you should spend more time focusing on what went wrong with Air America radio, and less time on trying to criticize the best political figure we have had in this country in 40 years. You seem "bitter" and jealous, perhaps because it is difficult to watch an intelligent, successful, honest man actually achieving his goals. I suppose that can be a hard pill to swallow, when clearly your own attempts have been met with such failure.

[Star123]

Best political figure in 40 years? Oh, you guys are so going to see how wrong you are! I almost laughed out loud at the phrase "honest man." They all three lie or mislead whenever they please. Just like Bush. We ought to be used to it by now. It's just that Obama is more devious. You will see.

[captnEarl]

Just what planet (STAR) are you from?? So out of touch you must not get the same information as the most of us. OBAMA will be MY president despite the votes of the coward racists in this country!!! You feel free to go ahead and LOL but we are in the process of taking our country back from the hell it's been in for years. My advice is to get realistic!!!

[drbala]

Honest! Puhleeeze. You were responding to this article, and in this article itself there was a mention of "Obama lying about his answers to the gun-questionairre." He lied about it in primetime on tv and later we found out that it was his own handwriting. He is only as honest as an Amway salesman--will tell you anything to get you to his side; once there you will never be able to see his imperfections. Such is the power of association with a magnetic personality and his/her cultlike followers.

[arvada]

uh mark i would say you had a bad month yourself effing off randi and destroying your network

[Kozan]

Blah, blah, blah, blah.... Mark Green - Corporate Centrist and Apologist. Time for a big change in this country Mark, but it appears that you'd rather retain the status quo of corrupt politics as usual. People see through you.

[Javalation]

"He's very at ease, funny and unflappable", aren't bad traits for a leader. McCain has a history of getting combative with those who disagree, and Hillary wants to cram her opinions down the throat of ever person who disagrees with her, so Obama is easily the most natural leader of the three.

[army193]

Mark it's called change...The Free ride of Corporations/Lobbyists is limited to Nov 2008...As Bush would say, your with us or your against us...What will it be?

[Pharos]

"your with us or your against us...What will it be?"

Well if Obama supporters, at least as represented on this site, keep attacking, vilifying and insulting everyone who disagrees in the slightest with their position, the answerer to your question may very well be "McCain"

I think you make a very good point quoting Bush. I now at least understand what Obama means by change from the old ways?

"plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose" — (Alphonse Karr, Les Guêpes, January 1849).

[milo9]

I would suggest that Obama is our front man, his Presidency is an ancillary issue, the point is to change the status quo of Neo-Cons and Corporate Dems. He's our rallying point. We're pushing him as much as he is leading us. That's the heart of his teflon coating.

[bclintonk]

Talk about "elitist" and condescending to voters . . . . Clinton and Stephanopoulos tag-team Obama with all manner of slander and innuendo, bordering on the worst of McCarthy-era red-baiting ("Have you ever been in a meeting with someone who 40 years ago was a member of the Weather Underground?"). The American people overwhelmingly have the good sense to see through it and to loudly, clearly, and angrily reject it as the worst sort of irrelevant political filth, a destructive sideshow to the real problems facing the country. Then Clinton apologist Mark Green has the audacity to muse about "why it didn't stick," i.e., why were the American people too stupid to fall for the bait, what political legerdemain on Obama's part could have caused them to take their eye off the ball and not follow Hillary down the path of character assassination? Give me a break. Fact is, every time Hillary goes negative, her own negatives soar. People are sick and tired of it. If it continues, it may inflict some damage on Obama, but it will inflict even more on Hillary. Worst case is that the Democratic nomination may not be worth having for either of them. But like Barack, I continue have faith in the American people. They see what's going on here, and the shabby game Hillary Clinton and her allies are playing. In fact they're pretty clear-eyed about it. That, more than anything, is why Obama marches on.

[SeriousBlack]

"Obama had a bad month and week. The combination of a poor debate performance and answering questions about his "bitter" comments put his campaign on the defensive. So why haven't the polls moved?"

ummm, maybe, Mark, it's because the issues that YOU seem to think should have moved the polls actually AREN'T issues that should have moved the polls.

Ever hear of Occam's Razor, Mark?

[Gibbons]

The polls are moving now with Clinton rising and Obama falling.

[S1m0n]

The primary costituent of political teflon is consent. If the public wants you to do whatever it is you're doing, then no amount of scandal will stick.

Obama is the beneficiary now, just as Bill Clinton was in the past over Monica, and George Bush has been more recently over torture.

[kellygrrrl]

"Obama-ites are indignant"

way to get the Dems together, Mr. Green

Sure hope Clinton doesn't need the "activists" or "young foolish voters" or "Obama-ites" or "boutique states" or "San Francisco elitists" or "MoveOn members" or .....

[avicenna]

It's really simple - the so-called "scandals" that Clinton and McCain try to smear Obama with are not only ridiculous - but an insult to the thinking American. Not wearing a pin? Really? saying that some people may be "bitter"? - say it isn't so! How can someone who is so unshallow be president? I guess we can only wait and see - unlike Clinton who has a dubious relationship with reality (a huge separation between her "experience" and those who share the rest of the planet with her) and McCain who has a hard time figuring out who, where, why America is set on a path of destruction in Iraq - only knowing that it will be assured to go on indefinitely - Obama's main fault that he fails the test of hypocrisy that the last few leaders were well equipped with. I think many Americans are kind of intrigued with this novelty.

[hoodrat]

I second your assumption : )

[bayman]

Hmmm...why haven't the polls moved? Let me count the ways...

1) Hillary's an admitted liar

2) Hillary has alienated all but her most fervent supporters (including Mr. Green) with her slimy campaign

3) Barack chose to take the high road and not wrestle in the mud with Hillary in the debate

4) Barack's a better candidate

5) Barack will be a better president

6) The electorate recognizes that Hillary would be happy to destroy the party in her attempt to steal the nomination

I'm probably missing other reasons, but you get the point.

[CeeLee]

Amen! Mark Green? your green eyed envy monster is showing. You tried UNSUCESSFULLY to run for Mayor of NYC more than once. You had neither style nor substance and now you attempt to belittle Mr. Obama's success against your loyal true blue partner in political crime HILLARY THE LIAR CLINTON. Birds of a feather flock together.

[Pharos]

All but the undecided have already made up their minds.

To quote SeriousBlack:

pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate

[GuyInNC]

Obama has lied several times. Including at least twice in last week's debate. YOu just refuse to acknowledge it. In fact, you excuse it.